Case Note & Summary
The matter arose from a writ petition filed by a 21-year-old student seeking quashing of an FIR registered by Ashok Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru, for offences under Sections 77, 78 and 79 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and Sections 66E and 67D of the Information Technology Act, 2000. The petitioner and respondent No.2, aged 20, were classmates and friends. The dispute originated from a single private Instagram message sent by the petitioner to respondent No.2, which read: 'U kinda look so hot in light coloured clothes.' The message was shown to the complainant's father, an IPS officer, leading to the registration of the FIR on 29.11.2024. During investigation, the petitioner's laptop and mobile phone were seized. The petitioner approached the High Court, which initially stayed further investigation. Respondent No.2, though served, remained unrepresented. The State opposed quashing, arguing that even a classmate had no right to comment on appearance. The petitioner contended that the message, between classmates, did not meet the ingredients of any of the charged offences and that permitting investigation would amount to abuse of process, causing grave prejudice to his career. The court examined the provisions. Section 77 BNS (voyeurism) requires watching or capturing images of a woman engaging in a private act; the message did not involve any such act. Section 78 BNS (stalking) demands repeated following or contacting despite disinterest; a solitary communication with no repetition, threat or further pursuit did not constitute stalking. Section 79 BNS (insult to modesty) necessitates an intention to insult modesty; a casual colloquial compliment lacked such intent. The court observed that the language, though informal, fell within contemporary youthful expression and was not intended to outrage modesty. Noting that the prosecution rested on a lone private message and that no ingredient of the alleged offences was made out, the court held that continuation of criminal proceedings would be a clear abuse of the process of law. Accordingly, the High Court allowed the writ petition and quashed the FIR in Crime No. 0363/2024 and all consequent proceedings, thereby vindicating the petitioner.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Voyeurism - Section 77 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 - Offence requires watching, capturing or disseminating image of a woman engaged in a private act; a solitary Instagram message stating 'U kinda look so hot in light coloured clothes' did not involve any such act. Court found no ingredient of voyeurism made out. (Paras 10, 12) B) Criminal Law - Stalking - Section 78 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 - Stalking necessitates repeated following or contacting despite clear disinterest, or monitoring electronic communication; a single message without series, repetition, threat or pursuit fails to satisfy the provision. Held that no case of stalking arose. (Paras 11, 12) C) Criminal Law - Insult to Modesty - Section 79 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 - Requires words, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman; casual colloquial compliment between classmates, lacking overtly sexual or demeaning intent, does not fall within the section's ambit. Held that the message did not evidence intention to insult modesty. (Paras 10-12) D) Constitutional Law - Quashing of FIR - Article 226 Constitution of India - Abuse of Process - High Court may quash FIR when allegations, even if taken at face value, do not disclose the offences charged and continuation would be abuse of process. Considering the trivial nature of the incident and its potential to jeopardise the petitioner's academic and professional future, the court quashed the FIR and all proceedings. (Paras 7, 10, 11)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the registration of FIR and investigation under Sections 77, 78, 79 BNS, 2023 and Sections 66E, 67D IT Act, 2000, based on a solitary Instagram message complimenting appearance, constituted an abuse of process and whether the FIR should be quashed.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition and quashed the FIR in Crime No. 0363/2024 and all consequent proceedings, holding that the solitary message did not satisfy the ingredients of the offences alleged and that continuation would amount to abuse of process.
Law Points
- Voyeurism under Section 77 BNS requires watching or capturing images of a woman in a private act
- a compliment on appearance does not constitute such act. Stalking under Section 78 BNS requires repeated following or contacting despite disinterest
- a single message does not amount to stalking. Insult to modesty under Section 79 BNS requires words
- gestures or acts intended to insult modesty
- a casual compliment between classmates lacks such intent. Criminal proceedings can be quashed under Article 226 if continuation amounts to abuse of process.
